测试“但是你是自由的”顺从获取技巧在礼貌解释中的有效性的抗拒性和互惠性

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Christopher J. Carpenter, A. Pascual
{"title":"测试“但是你是自由的”顺从获取技巧在礼貌解释中的有效性的抗拒性和互惠性","authors":"Christopher J. Carpenter, A. Pascual","doi":"10.1080/15534510.2016.1156569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Two studies were conducted to assess whether reactance or politeness offers a better explanation of the effectiveness of the “but you are free” (BYAF) technique of gaining compliance. The first was conducted with an online survey in the US (N = 131) and found that the BYAF was associated with lower perceived freedom threat than a control or polite request. The second was a field study and collected data in France (N = 372), Norway (N = 360), and the US (N = 108) to test a 3 (direct request, polite request, or BYAF) × 2 (requester benefits or 3rd party group benefits) design. The BYAF was associated with higher compliance than the other two messages.","PeriodicalId":46580,"journal":{"name":"Social Influence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing the reactance vs. the reciprocity of politeness explanations for the effectiveness of the “but you are free” compliance-gaining technique\",\"authors\":\"Christopher J. Carpenter, A. Pascual\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15534510.2016.1156569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Two studies were conducted to assess whether reactance or politeness offers a better explanation of the effectiveness of the “but you are free” (BYAF) technique of gaining compliance. The first was conducted with an online survey in the US (N = 131) and found that the BYAF was associated with lower perceived freedom threat than a control or polite request. The second was a field study and collected data in France (N = 372), Norway (N = 360), and the US (N = 108) to test a 3 (direct request, polite request, or BYAF) × 2 (requester benefits or 3rd party group benefits) design. The BYAF was associated with higher compliance than the other two messages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Influence\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Influence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2016.1156569\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Influence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2016.1156569","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

摘要:本文通过两项研究来评估“但是你有空”(BYAF)技巧在获得服从的有效性中,是抗拒还是礼貌更有效。第一个是在美国进行的一项在线调查(N = 131),发现与控制或礼貌的请求相比,BYAF与更低的感知自由威胁相关。第二项是实地研究,在法国(N = 372)、挪威(N = 360)和美国(N = 108)收集数据,以测试3(直接请求、礼貌请求或BYAF) × 2(请求者福利或第三方团体福利)设计。与其他两个消息相比,BYAF具有更高的遵从性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing the reactance vs. the reciprocity of politeness explanations for the effectiveness of the “but you are free” compliance-gaining technique
Abstract Two studies were conducted to assess whether reactance or politeness offers a better explanation of the effectiveness of the “but you are free” (BYAF) technique of gaining compliance. The first was conducted with an online survey in the US (N = 131) and found that the BYAF was associated with lower perceived freedom threat than a control or polite request. The second was a field study and collected data in France (N = 372), Norway (N = 360), and the US (N = 108) to test a 3 (direct request, polite request, or BYAF) × 2 (requester benefits or 3rd party group benefits) design. The BYAF was associated with higher compliance than the other two messages.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Influence
Social Influence PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: Social Influence is a journal that provides an integrated focus for research into this important, dynamic, and multi-disciplinary field. Topics covered include: conformity, norms, social influence tactics such as norm of reciprocity, authority, scarcity, interpersonal influence, persuasion, power, advertising, mass media effects, political persuasion, propaganda, comparative influence, compliance, minority influence, influence in groups, cultic influence, social movements, social contagions, rumors, resistance to influence, influence across cultures, and the history of influence research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信